Success of rule of law in Inidan since Independence
🔹 What Is Rule of Law?
The Rule of Law is a foundational principle of a democratic state, meaning:
No one is above the law, including the government.
Equality before the law.
Due process and fair procedures must be followed.
Government powers must be exercised within legal limits.
In India, the Rule of Law is implicit in the Constitution — particularly in:
Preamble (justice, liberty, equality)
Article 14 (equality before the law)
Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty)
Article 32 & 226 (judicial review)
🔹 Success of Rule of Law in India Since Independence
Despite challenges like emergency excesses, corruption, and administrative arbitrariness, India has successfully upheld the Rule of Law through:
An independent judiciary
Strong constitutional provisions
Judicial activism and PILs
Expanding the scope of fundamental rights
Striking down arbitrary executive actions and unconstitutional laws
🔹 Key Case Laws (More Than 4) on Rule of Law in India
✅ 1. A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950)
Citation: AIR 1950 SC 27
Facts:
Detention under the Preventive Detention Act was challenged as violating fundamental rights.
Held:
Initially, the Court gave a narrow view — as long as a law existed, the state could deprive liberty.
Impact:
Though the ruling was restrictive, it initiated the judicial discourse on Rule of Law and personal liberty. Later overturned.
✅ 2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
Citation: AIR 1978 SC 597
Facts:
Her passport was impounded without a hearing under the Passport Act.
Held:
The Court overruled Gopalan and held that any law affecting personal liberty must be just, fair, and reasonable under Article 21.
Significance:
Strengthened substantive due process and affirmed that Rule of Law demands fair procedures.
✅ 3. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
Citation: AIR 1973 SC 1461
Facts:
Challenged constitutional amendments affecting property rights and fundamental rights.
Held:
Court evolved the Basic Structure Doctrine, ruling that Parliament cannot amend the Constitution to destroy its essential features like Rule of Law, judicial review, and fundamental rights.
Significance:
Preserved the supremacy of the Constitution and the Rule of Law as part of the basic structure.
✅ 4. ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) (Habeas Corpus Case)
Citation: AIR 1976 SC 1207
Facts:
During Emergency, the government suspended habeas corpus. Citizens were detained without legal remedy.
Held:
The majority held that during Emergency, even the right to life could be suspended.
Criticism:
This was a setback to Rule of Law, as it allowed the executive to override individual rights.
Later Reversed:
In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (2017), the Court called ADM Jabalpur "clearly wrong" and reaffirmed Rule of Law as inalienable.
✅ 5. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)
Citation: AIR 1975 SC 2299
Facts:
Validity of the 39th Amendment which tried to shield the Prime Minister’s election from judicial review.
Held:
Court struck down the amendment as violating the basic structure, including free and fair elections and Rule of Law.
Significance:
Ensured that no one, not even the PM, is above the law.
✅ 6. I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007)
Citation: AIR 2007 SC 861
Facts:
Challenged laws placed in the Ninth Schedule (meant to be immune from judicial review).
Held:
Court ruled that even Ninth Schedule laws are subject to judicial review if they violate basic structure including Rule of Law.
Significance:
Reaffirmed the judiciary’s power to uphold constitutional supremacy.
✅ 7. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) (Right to Privacy Case)
Citation: (2017) 10 SCC 1
Facts:
Challenged Aadhaar and state surveillance.
Held:
Recognized right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 and emphasized that government power must be constrained by Rule of Law.
Significance:
Modern reaffirmation that the state is accountable and must operate within the law.
🔹 Challenges to Rule of Law in India
Despite many successes, India has faced challenges:
Emergency abuses (1975–77)
Delays in justice
Police and administrative discretion
Corruption and lack of transparency
Inequality in access to legal remedies
However, courts have responded robustly through PILs, expanding rights, and holding the government accountable.
🔹 Summary Table
| Case | Contribution to Rule of Law |
|---|---|
| Maneka Gandhi (1978) | Fair procedure under Article 21 |
| Kesavananda Bharati (1973) | Basic structure includes Rule of Law |
| Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) | No one is above law; judicial review upheld |
| ADM Jabalpur (1976) | Setback, later overruled; highlighted need for Rule of Law |
| I.R. Coelho (2007) | Judicial review over Ninth Schedule laws |
| Puttaswamy (2017) | Privacy and due process as components of Rule of Law |
🔹 Conclusion
Since Independence, Rule of Law has been a guiding principle in Indian constitutional governance. While there have been setbacks, the judiciary has played a crucial role in ensuring that:
The Constitution remains supreme
All are equal before the law
Fundamental rights are protected
Arbitrary power is curtailed
The Rule of Law in India has not only survived but has evolved, adapting to challenges and reaffirming the vision of a just, democratic, and accountable state.
RELATED Blog
0 comments